On Thu, 2006-01-26 at 06:32 +0000, Michael Tinsay wrote: > --- Paolo Alexis Falcone <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > That's only as good until your machine crashes, > > which wipes out every > > service you mentioned. Not a good idea to have a > > single point of > > failure. > > > That's what the backup machines are for. You didn't > include it in your quote of my message. ;-) >
And the backup machines do what while your main server is running? Or in case of cold backups, how long would it take you to recover the data and configurations and in the end the services to 100% functionality? Are the backups just there so that you can fix the main server, or are they meant to be standalone boxes themselves? > In any case, most of the services I will be putting in > this supersized server are *not* mission-critical > apps. If it's not a mission critical app, then there's no point in having a dedicated server for it. Meaning, if you just want a DNS server, use the one your ISP provides for you. If your mail transfer agent is not critical to your enterprise, then you should just use some email hosting company's service for your email needs. If you don't need a central file server, just do per-workstation shares. If you don't need a dynamically and centrally configured DHCP server, then use static IP addresses and a class A network block on your enterprise network. Since they're not mission critical, they don't deserve (however little) attention you are giving it. It just doesn't make business sense. > > I really do not see the advantage of spreading > services like DHCP, DNS, Samba, Postfix, etc. into > different linux boxes for a user population of 100 or > less. Spreading them into two or more boxes would > mean more machines to monitor and administer. > That's because you're looking at it form the inside. Think about it -- if suddenly your enterprise grows (by the help of some economic factor) then how do you scale if you have just one "super server" which manages all the services "easily" ? And what if the services go down, or slow to an embarrassingly sluggish pace? > A pretty current workstation-class machine could > easily handle the load, especially if you're a > micro/SMB shop who don't have the budget for a > server-grade box. > Then it's a matter of economics, more than just getting a sound solution to the problem. I maintain: if the services are not integral to your operations, you don't need to provide/maintain them. My $0.02 worth. -- Dean Michael C. Berris Mobile +639287291459 URL http://mikhailberis.blogspot.com YMID: mikhailberis _________________________________________________ Philippine Linux Users' Group (PLUG) Mailing List [email protected] (#PLUG @ irc.free.net.ph) Read the Guidelines: http://linux.org.ph/lists Searchable Archives: http://archives.free.net.ph
